CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 4 mars 2016

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA6BC7FA7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:right } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase }   Communicated on 4 March 2016   FIFTH SECTION Application no 51405/12 AXEL SPRINGER AG and RTL TELEVISION GMBH against Germany lodged on 8 August 2012 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns a judicial order of the president of a criminal chamber at the beginning of a trial for murder banning the publication of pictures and photographic reports in which the accused could be identified. Pictures were only allowed to be published after making the face of the accused unrecognisable by technical measures such as pixelisation. The applicants, a publishing house and a private broadcasting company, complain about a breach of their right to freedom of expression under Article 10 § 1 of the Convention. QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Has there been an interference with the applicants’ freedom of expression, in particular their right to impart information, within the meaning of Article 10 § 1 of the Convention? If so, was that interference prescribed by law and necessary in terms of Article 10 § 2 of the Convention?   2.     To what extent are the duties and responsibilities inherent in the applicants’ activities relevant to their claim and the State’s margin of appreciation in this field?